Put a timer lock on the first strategic point on every map

Suggestions
1

There’s already a timer on some maps so that one side or the other can’t capture the point until a certain amount of time has passed or it prevents a point from changing hands too quickly.

FAR too many maps find the attackers on top of a strategic point before the defenders have the time to set up rally points, etc. It removes a lot of the authenticity of a map and devalues so much of the extra stuff that are in the game.

On top of that, a lot of people (on the losing side) will see the first capture happen in 30-60 seconds and then desert, which more often than not, are decent players who don’t want to invest time in a wipe-out, which accelerates the loss for the losing side.

I don’t like these types of games from either side of that equation. If on the winning side, I spend 10 minutes getting few points, b/c the game is more about how fast the zones are captured and not about actual fighting, so there are less tanks, planes, soldiers to shoot, very few engineering obstacles or machine gun nests, etc etc.

On the other hand, if a side has 60 seconds to build up a defense, or if the attacker can bring up their tanks, it’ll make for a (hopefully) more competitive battle. There will be time for defenders and attacker to set rally points.

But more importantly than all of that - there’s more immersion. Rarely were battles fought where you would race like made to hold a random spot in the middle of a building and every battle fought was about the 5-10 soldiers who could hold that spot until moving to the next one.

Normally, there’s entrenching, and attempts for combined warfare, perhaps taking some binoculars out and scouting the enemy etc. There’s no pause at the beginning to get set at all.

I get that there were things like blitzkrieg, but even then, that was where the tanks were out front, way ahead of the infantry, not the other way around, like in this game.

I’d rather be the loser on a slog/close match that took 20 minutes but I get 4000 points times 1.2 than be a winner in a match where I get 900 points and 1.5. It’s both more fun and I get more points anyway from the longer, more competitive match. Plus, it feels like the losing side put up a fight and made it close.

14 Likes
2

I agree 110%.

I currently have the problem where if the enemy team, or my team is too good, we steamroll each objective one after another and the game will last 5-8minutes and it’s no fun, nor is it fair for a team who is just spawning into the game.

If I connect to a game that started 1minute ago, we have lost the objective and it’s a cycle of constant loss. There should be a larger distance for the attackers to travel to get to an objective, as well as a BF1/BFV system of “ Eliminate the remaining players in the sector” Before the advance onto the next objective as possible. As well as implementing a locked objective for up to 30 seconds or a minute.

This would extend the games time and play, as well as allow players to have time to enjoy the ability to build defensive and offensive structures for an assault or defense objective.

5 Likes
3

pretty easy solution to steam rolling.

That being said though. the defenders should also be forced to fall back, instead of staying on the old objective and effectively spawn raping the attackers before they can move on…

3 Likes
4

I thought about the same.
It seems to work well enough so don’t reinvent a wheel and copy this solution.

4 Likes
5

As someone above and below your point mentioned:

That would take care of it, though, I’d say that another, possibly easy thing to add would be to have any spawn points explode/be destroyed in the sector that was captured. Perhaps within 15 - 30 seconds, or whatever.

Having said that - they should not implement one without the other - if they don’t put a lock timer on the capture point, they should not remove the rally points. Those points, right now, are some of the only things keeping steamrolling from being worse than it already is.

2 Likes
6

how about instead, the grey zone starts moving immediately - however not all at once, basically the grey zone creeps and grows slow enough for the defenders to catch on, but wont allow them to linger.

1 Like
7

so it like battle royale style gray zone

1 Like
8

You are not able to stay at the objective and spawn kill, the attacking team is spawn protected. Its actually quite the opposite… when the defenders lose the objective, and the next spawn wave of attackers response, if you are trying to retreat, and the enemy spawns on you, you are killed immediately because there is no way up for you or your squad to defend yourselves against a spawn protected enemy. This happened to me last night while I was playing a dominant heights confrontation match. We had lost the first objective so quickly, and when I responded for my second spawn of soldiers in a squad, I spawned and was immediately cut down because the enemy had spawned where our old spawn was.

1 Like
9

Yes, I agree, the steam rolling is never fun, on either side. I especially hate it when it’s my team that is doing the steamrolling because then I am unable to get any kills because I am so far from the front line, because there is no way that I can spawn closer to the battlefield or objective after we get objective after objective. at least as a defender you’re already the objective to some degree.

But I agree, they should implement two or three of these systems.

  1. Objective lock timer
  2. Attacker spawn point pushed further back
  3. (Most important) Eliminate Remaining defenders before next objective area is unlocked/open
    (Optional)
  4. Remove defending and attacking rally points if they are on the next objective already, to prevent immediate steamrolling.
1 Like
10

On some game modes that Greyzone advancement technically exists. On confrontation as well as invasion on most maps. Some maps based on where the objective is located on the map. Sometimes the gray zone changing barely makes a difference because the objectives will be in the same square kilometer area. (To a degree at least)

1 Like
11

That would work, just not sure if it’s easy or hard to do, just hope the Devs look into it, one way or another.

2 Likes
12

The thing that should also happen is that weight penalties should be incurred for BOTH the primary and secondary weapons and switching to a knife or a grenade or a pistol should not reduce the weight penalty.

There are some people who will streak from cap to cap thinking that the only point of the game is to see a Victory screen to the total detriment of everyone else playing the round. It’s a form of griefing and should be stopped.

Defenders are forced to fallback after about 30 seconds. The grey line moves behind the captured point and anyone still attempting to fight at the lost capture point gets zapped by the timer. I think the opposite of what you suggest. I don’t think that any of the “forward” spawn points should be protected. If you spawn into the point right beside me, it’s extremely jarring and immersion breaking to turn and fire at them only to see a stupid shield icon float above their heads; they should die.

13

Just want to give an example of one I just played (I took a screenshot and the score is literally still on my screen). It wasn’t the typical “Germans have more high levels” since we (allies) were playing against the Japanese and far outnumbered their skilled players (they had none) - predictably, they were steamrolled.

Now, this is a weird game, as it was a “Capture A-B-C and hold them” style - which CAN be fun, but sometimes are just like others, a rout. And, again, if there’d been at least a 60 second timer of being able to capture a point, it wouldn’t have been so bad. But, in this case, the Allies were able to split forces, wipe out the first wave, and then concentrate on the last point held by the enemy. All three were capped in perhaps the first two minutes.

Just look at the total number of kills, and you can see most of the damage to the Japanese was the kill-timer after they lost all three points.

steamroll1
steamroll11920×1282 142 KB

I JUST left this game, and even though I was in third place overall, I scored less than 1000 points, and ended with a pathetic less than 5k points, even with the bonus for getting badges and winning.

This really isn’t fun for anyone, but it’s “log out and never want to play again” for newbies just trying out the game.

I like this game a lot - more than many other FPSs out there. A few tweaks (like timers on strategic points) can really help in balancing out matches and/or increasing immersion.

1 Like
14

I’m torn on this one. Yeah steamrolling is an issue especially if the attackers simply charge in all at once but at the same time, I also disagree with this post simply for the fact a coordinated team on defense can divide into 2 sections where two can place rallies and fortifications and the other two can go up front and run interference to buy time. And then each time a person dies, they can respawn and build a rally point. And if the attacking team are coordinated enough to use the map’s elements to their advantage then they earn the right to fast cap the first point. Trust me, i play with a team of 12 others and we’ve managed to outplay 95% of the players we come across simply for the way we rotate squad pushes and counterpushes on offense and defense and for the way we use most maps.

1 Like
15

LOL I bet you do! Likely because 95% of the players don’t organize like you all do.

Which means, the game is serving the tiny minority and not the majority - and, you have to admit, steamrolling wastes the winners time as much as it does the losers, due to less points per game.

1 Like
16

Me and most of my group were maxed on all campaigns. Lol but i do remember how that felt beforehand

1 Like
17

LOL so whilst arguing against steamrolling you’re asking for changes that will reinforce it.

The whole point of ensuring your flanks are cleared of the enemy is to wipe out any remaining spawn points that can threaten the flanks of the advance and slow you down or deny you a given objective. The creeping greyzone already does some of this work for you, by compressing the battle space in certain modes, however, this approach is just a juiced up run and gun recipe, where as long as you push the flanks will fold in on themselves.

1 Like
18

Agreed - that’s why in my post, I mention doing one without the other - if they ONLY removed players, it would make the steamrolling worse, since, at least for a few minutes before the gray zone moves, the attackers have to be mindful of enemies still in their area.

(Which if anything, is more realistic and immersive…)

1 Like
19

This seems to prevent the P-47 + paras assault strategy in Pacific

2 Likes
20

No, you misread what I have stated. What I a stating is currently NOT in game. The grey zone moving after an objective sometimes occurs depending on the next objective.

Laugh all you want, what I stated is logical and has been done in different games and has been very successful for stopping constant steamrolling.