Ethics & what constitutes a good game

[Scotty]

Re: Ethics & what constitutes a good game

a) Go ahead and arty them. That's what artillery is for. I can't count how many times I've spawned at a point, either cappable or uncappable just to have arty raining down on my head at the moment. I normally just shrug, consider my timing poor and respawn. If there is only one spot where the enemy is left, i.e, their uncappable flag, then I hope that is where my commander is dropping arty. If we beat them back that far, I don't want them running amok all over the map.

b) I tend to stay at least a reasonable distance from the base. Close enough that I can see where people are going, but far enough that I'm not just shooting them the moment they spawn. I give them a chance to make a run for it before I snipe them

c) I have played with plenty of commanders to know that they can stay in armor somewhere and command just fine while occasionally helping out with the fight. I've also played with some that take the "hide in a hut" approach and completely sucked. I agree that they shouldn't hog armor, but if they are doing their job and then still save my ass from another tank by jumping into the fight and blowing it up, I'll return the favor next time I know there is a spec ops creeping around near them.

Getting beat down is no fun. If you are creative, you can normally find some way to break out of those bases though. I can normally find some way around the side or back and go cap a flag. What ****es me off is when my team is too stupid to help or even spawn at the flag I just capped. If they are that hopeless they deserve to lose and I will often end up leaving the game if it continues the next round. I have played games where we get killed one round and then turn it around the next. Sure it sucks losing, but if your team loses, there is a reason. Accept it.

If people want to get all ethical about how they play the game, they should quit shooting the medics. In real live war, medics are supposed to be left alone. Never made much sense to me, but it is something to think about. Since the medics are getting shot all the damn time, why complain when your team gets beat back and bunkered into it's uncappable base?

[Donkey]

Re: Ethics & what constitutes a good game

An extended debate about this is somewhat pointless. Bottom line, it wasn't your server and therefore you have to play by someone elses rules.

If you don't like it or wish to play by a different set of rules, find another server or rent your own.

This is all true for as long as it is not a RANKED server. If the server is RANKED, not only did they pay for it but they also agreed to the EA EULA, which is very specific about not allwoing admins to run around on a power trip...i.e. they cant threaten to ban you because you wont give them a choper or tank, they cant threaten to ban you because you are doing better then them....there is a whole bunch more but people need to realize the difference between a RANKED server and a UNRANKED server....Just simply saying oh well they paid for it means they can do whatever they want is wrong...let me put it this way, you PAID for BF2 but you don't OWN it...

As for the commander thing, if the game developers intended for the commander to do anything other than command they would give points for doing it....if you notice as commander you dont get shizzle for points if you cap a flag, heal soemone, etc...

Now if the server is half empty and the teams really suck, I dont see any problem with the commander playing multiple roles...since in these situations half the time no one wants to be commander...

[A_Dirty_Hippie]

Re: Ethics & what constitutes a good game

BF2 is a game, it's meant to be fun, and EVERY player should have fun playing it. Getting wasted two seconds after you spawn without you being able to do anything is NOT fun. Sometimes I feel like the people around me are playing a mmorpg. What's the big freakin difference between having 20 or 100 points?? Are you going to write it on your resume, or brag about it when you're at the pub with a date??

Chess is a game too. Do you suggest the player with the most pieces give some of his opponents captured ones back? Considering the the points needed for rank and unlocks 80 is a big difference.

No offence there, but I think your views on the matter like "Uncappables should be raped, we were better, we deserve some free points" are actually quite selfish.

I dont think there should be any such thing as uncappable. BF:V had none that I can remember just really long cap times.
I think your views like "Its not fun for me so you shouldnt do it" are actually quite selfish.

I hate spawn campers with a passion, and I'll put all my energy into finding and killing them before the end of the round.
So please don't do it, think of the other team.
That's it for A) and B)

You should put all your energy into avoiding that situation.

As for C) I think the commander should focus on commandeering. I never play as commander but believe me, an APC is far easier to spot and to dodge than a guy laying prone under a flight of case (and it's also much more tempting to blow it up)

Commanders should be allowed to adapt to the situations just like everyone else. In the O.P.'s situation the commander in an apc is porbably very effective. Everyone has there own way of commanding both in game and in real life. The only wrong way to do it is they way that costs you the round.

[Kattspya]

Re: Ethics & what constitutes a good game

Please read my posts and think before posting your own message. I have stated at least twice that I am not moaning about the admin making a rule in his server, I'm talking about the concept of "baseraping" as a whole and why people seem to think it's such a crime.

On the surface you seem to be dismissing a genuine discussion, something in short supply here, out of hand because you have nothing useful to contribute.

I saw that part but I don't understand what use a discussion is. Some people like baseraping and some don't, never shall the two meet. As far as I'm concerned a discussion is more or less pointless unless you just want to understand someones justification for not liking baserape. It's just preferences not a good thing to debate over IMO.

What are your reasons for wanting a discussion?

[glaucoma]

Re: Ethics & what constitutes a good game

"Quote glaucoma" - "especially looking how it's easy to wipe out "baserapers" if you actually use the assets given to you."

How do you wipe out "baserapers", when your base, according to you has mines/claymores, infantry, enemy that have taken off with your choppers and you have artillary incomming ?

You have no assets to take the baserapers out with, and will be killed as you spawn giving you no time to get to these assets that are'nt there.

Mining/claymoring bases that are being raped is senseless, why bother with it? Mining/claymoring bases is what you do when your team is having a hard time and you try to diminish the forces the enemy can throw into the battle.
Also, the first time someone blows up with a locked vehicle (at the very latest), it's time to have an engineer check/unlock your vehicles. If you have no engineer (poor team!), throw a grenade near the vehicle. It's not rocket science.

And I'm sorry, but when a coordinated squad works together, establishing a defence isn't hard.
The first thing is to get away from the arty strike. Then you have a long enough time window to act.
Another thing next to noone seems to be using is the various mounts. A dedicated squad can easily wipe out baseraping armor within minutes when coordinating the use of the TOWs and your own anti-armor capacities (AT guys/specops/engineers).
The next step is logically to send 2 squads out behind the enemy lines to take spawns. That way the enemy will be distracted and you can mop up anything still in your base.
Then you can worry about getting your chopper back, 3 guys in 3 buggies making good use of the .50 MG can often achieve that within minutes.

Another thing is, people who make it out of the base while arty hits should have other guys spawn on them, not IN the base. Raping an empty base will become very boring very fast for the spawnrapers, and if you find you cannot get rid of them at all, use the squads to retake other flags.

[old sch00l]

Re: Ethics & what constitutes a good game

Deja vu to the days of BF'42 - an unwritten rule that constituted an ethic and helped to create a good game in BF'42 (only concerning uncappable flags), which I think should be applied when playing BF2.

Correct me if I'm wrong but most of the community back then used to adear to this rule..

-If there are uncapable Bases on a map they should NOT be attacked untill ALL the cappable flags have been taken. Once capped, the base can be attacked, BUT, as soon as any of the cappable flags turn neutral or back in enemy hands, then the assault on the base stops to try to and regain all cappable flags.

This was descided after months of discussion to premote the original gameplay that was intended.

Also solves lots of lamness IMHO

[LaGrenouille]

Re: Ethics & what constitutes a good game

Chess is a game too. Do you suggest the player with the most pieces give some of his opponents captured ones back? Considering the the points needed for rank and unlocks 80 is a big difference.

Well in chess you can't say stuck in the corner of the set, when it's your turn, you can play and think until you've made your move, not until some smacktard puts lead in your head or arty blasts you 50 meters up
That is what's really frustrating
(BTW, I picked 20 and 100 randomly... I'll just say 40 and 60, if it makes you feel better)

I dont think there should be any such thing as uncappable. BF:V had none that I can remember just really long cap times.
I think your views like "Its not fun for me so you shouldnt do it" are actually quite selfish.

Of course it's not fun for me!! I never spawn camped and I never will! And I expect the favor to be returned... It's not about something that's unpleasant just for me!
Otherwise we agree on the fact that there shouldn't be uncappables. At least, when you're getting owned, it's over quickly, and good tactics can really win you the game

You should put all your energy into avoiding that situation.

hehe, smart guy...
Well get me really angry in game without spawnraping, and I might just try!
but good luck!

Commanders should be allowed to adapt to the situations just like everyone else. In the O.P.'s situation the commander in an apc is porbably very effective. Everyone has there own way of commanding both in game and in real life. The only wrong way to do it is they way that costs you the round.

Sure if you can command and fight effectively at the same time then do it, by all means! But I'm not sure many people can...

[CtrlAltDe1337]

Re: Ethics & what constitutes a good game

Mature discussion only pls. Ideally, rather than a one line answer, compose an actual useful post...

I recently played Fusche Pass as USMC Commander, on a full 32 player server with autobalance on. Frighteningly quickly the team had took ALL CPs on the map, leaving only the uncappable PLA spawn left. My team, based from the nearest CP to their spawn was hanging back, not moving in. As commander I was helping my team - scanning, UAVs, supply drops and artillery where needed. I also hung back in an APC so I was well positioned to catch anyone who slipped through the net.

What frustrated me was the admins on the server telling me NOT to artillery their spawn and to get out of the APC, apparently because I wasn't commanding. I found this pretty annoying... After all, through more effective teamwork and skill we had fought our way to their doorstep and now we were threatened with bans because we were better?

This is not a case of "winning at all costs/at the expense of fun". Although less challenging than a more finely balanced battle, the opportunity for fun was still there - the PLA need to break out, and fast, and we need to contain them. The fact is we did, but using an artifical, "ethical" constraint I found unnecessary.

a) Artillery on spawn. Granted it doesn't give people spawning much chance to fight back, but that's the point. We need to stop them breaking out, so we use the weapons we have to do so. Is it not more fun having a real challenge, breaking out under fire, than to simply be gifted a chance to get out?

b) Not allowed to enter spawn. The admins also banned our team from entering the spawn under the "no baserape" excuse. Although I agree with the idea of holding back, I don't agree with the reason. Firstly, entering the base leaves armour MUCH more susceptible to attack from all sides so it is safer to adopt a vantage position from afar and let them come to you in dribs and drabs. But again, giving the opposing team an artificial "chance" takes enjoyment away from both sides. It's not a game then, not a competition. It's a farce. However, note the distinction between "attacking an enemy base" and "spawn camping". Attacking a base gives people a fighting chance. Spawn camping inhibits the enemy from spawning altogether.

c) Commanders in vehicles. *sigh* I know I will be forever frustrated by people who think that commanders MUST be lying prone in a building somewhere with their face in the map. It's simply not true. Commanders who do this see the pointy end of knives too much for comfort and can't help their team out as much. A commander in a vehicle behind the current battle front is more useful, able to command and react to breakthroughs in a timely and efficient matter.

What do people think about these points? Do you think it is acceptable to want the enemy to fight back properly, drive you off and win or do you think that you should reward THEM with artificial chances because your team is simply better at the game? Should commanders cower in bunkers or help their team out in as many ways as is possible?

Answers & justifications please

I totaly agree with this.

[vbl]

Re: Ethics & what constitutes a good game

Correct me if I'm wrong but most of the community back then used to adear to this rule..

-If there are uncapable Bases on a map they should NOT be attacked untill ALL the cappable flags have been taken. Once capped, the base can be attacked, BUT, as soon as any of the cappable flags turn neutral or back in enemy hands, then the assault on the base stops to try to and regain all cappable flags.

That's a stupid f*cking rule, and I've thought so since BF1942. A team should be able to attack an opposing team's uncappable as long as the opposing owns at least one other CP - enabling them to spawn elsewhere, which effectively diffuses any spawncamping. Encouraging players to camp a spawn (that can't be captured) when the other team has nowhere else to go is a coward's excuse to pad his mediocre score with easy kills.

[Colonel_Krust]

Re: Ethics & what constitutes a good game

the whole point of the spec ops class is to blow up assets and be a pain in the tail behind enemy lines. If i am comming and my sabatouer unit isn't doing that then they need a demotion. I want them causing mischief in the uncappable asset laden spawn so my other units can cap flags.

Krusty

[MrE|PUB]

Re: Ethics & what constitutes a good game

A) the first 30 seconds of the map are crucial to which team wins a lot of the time. that artillery can be devasting to one side for a good 10/15 minutes as the opposition sieze the best resources with no competition. that to me sounds like good commanding. return fire or suffer the consequences. the problem here lies with the different players joining the map at different times. the commnader can unleash he artillery so it hits as a lot of players are just spawning. in contrast, counterstrike has a dummy 10 second round allowing the majority of players to join then all spawning simultaneously at the real start. i have 2 gigs of ram so meh that plane is mine and i aint getting arty by noone

B) people enetering spawn in a tank can seriously hinder one teams airpower for a substatial period of time. yes its annoying repeatedly dying next to your spawning vehicle. be antitank/spec ops and fight back. he got there through your own teams shortcomings. how many times did the commander spot him and your team just ignored it? i have found my time as commander as i go for expert very frustrating with squads totally ignoring orders and even uavs proving to them the base is full of/devoid of enemy. a team is only as strong as its weakest link. thats the problem with team games on publics eh?

a team entering/attacking an uncappable base having driven the enemy back there is obviously debatable. i understand the our team will never escape and the our team deserves these points for beating you back arguments. i wonder what the rules of etiquette are in clan matches regarding this? surely this will set the precedent

C) a commander in an apc can hold a the key commander asset base no trouble. the commande is fit to deploy his resources/troops as he sees fit. it is not a waste of resources it is a use. if i sit there as an engineer, sure i can see em coming, tell squad 1 (who ignore me) and watch (hoping they will get away quickly allowing me to recapture) as they take the flag and WORSE destroy the scanner, uav etc. the impact on the team should this occur is huge. the use of one apc that comprehensively covers that flag and gives ability to sprint to neighbouring flags to defend, is in my opinion,a good defensive use of resources. and its the commander pulling the strings isnt it? if thats his tactic so be it. may be the best commander win

[old sch00l]

Re: Ethics & what constitutes a good game

That's a stupid f*cking rule, and I've thought so since BF1942. A team should be able to attack an opposing team's uncappable as long as the opposing owns at least one other CP - enabling them to spawn elsewhere, which effectively diffuses any spawncamping. Encouraging players to camp a spawn (that can't be captured) when the other team has nowhere else to go is a coward's excuse to pad his mediocre score with easy kills.

I totally agree with you, but spawncamping is another issue that I was not specifically referring too.

Uncappable flags were deemned necessary to balance the map in the first place, thats why not all maps have them, and also why they have a no go symbol plastered all over them

[glaucoma]

Re: Ethics & what constitutes a good game

C) a commander in an apc can hold a the key commander asset base no trouble. the commande is fit to deploy his resources/troops as he sees fit. it is not a waste of resources it is a use. if i sit there as an engineer, sure i can see em coming, tell squad 1 (who ignore me) and watch (hoping they will get away quickly allowing me to recapture) as they take the flag and WORSE destroy the scanner, uav etc. the impact on the team should this occur is huge. the use of one apc that comprehensively covers that flag and gives ability to sprint to neighbouring flags to defend, is in my opinion,a good defensive use of resources. and its the commander pulling the strings isnt it? if thats his tactic so be it. may be the best commander win

You have a point there. However, without any exception whatsoever, all commanders sitting in APCs I've encountered so far either

-got blown to **** by infiltrating specops
or
-sat around uncaring in their comfy apc while all hell was breaking loose around them
or
-used their commander toys to pave the way for their APC kills, got taken apart by the chopper about 0.5 minutes into his assault, and constantly ignored any of their squad leader's pleas for UAV/scan/arty/supplies/orders/...

[MidnightOps]

Re: Ethics & what constitutes a good game

IMO uncappable bases are the same as cappable ones. You just can't capture the uncappable. Saying this, a commander should be free to artillery an uncappable base. Saying you can't artillery an uncappable base is like saying you can't artillery a cappable base - just without the privilage of capturing the uncappable base. (a bit confusing)

Someone must have just got mad at the enemy coming into their base when they had no place to go. Therefore making up this obsurd 'rule'.

[Cluster]

Re: Ethics & what constitutes a good game

Slightly off topic..... why do some commanders sit at flags instead of out of the action? I've seen plenty of commanders killed and therefore unable to support the team due to being in an obvious spot.