yes
its simple, yet effective and i dont play enlisted for its “amazing” realism
Is the parachuting into battle a terrible idea? I think at least the paratrooper squads should be allowed.
Pick a spawn point on map and only the 82nd and 101rst etc Airborne divisions can drop into battle. No grey zone drops obviously.
Maybe they are invincible until 20ft off of ground but are highly visible to enemy, so no advantage for either.
If i could make my own topics, I would make one about this. I think it would be really fun and change the game slightly for better .
It would actually be a really cool trade-off. You get to paradrop behind the lines but if at least one enemy nudges their mouse a bit upwards, they can just shoot you down (obviously ai should be adjusted for this, but so far I had a ton of fun doing a bombing run or two then paradropping behind the lines in normal bombers and was shot down like once when I tried to paradop on top of an enemy squad of 9 people).
So you got blown up by ap mine placed on rally point and decided that the whole mechanic of rally points is wrong. What a tragedy
I don’t know how many times the rally booby trap happened to you, but generally speaking, it is very rare someone break through whole enemy defending the point and has enough time to find the rally point and gently place AP mine, then flees. Realism? Think it as a booby trap. At least in Geneva Conventions there wasn’t rule about booby trap at rally point.
but, what about soviet roof rallies?
Spawn prot is already annoying, especially if you’re putting up a last stand in the soon-to-be-gray zone.
Conscript_Joe
Placing mines on rally points placed way too near the obj.? It’s… SMART!
I respect crafty ppl. Wouldn’t change a thing here. You don’t like that? Then either build your rally points further away or chose those who you deem safe…
I agree, whining because an opponent made a clever move, and you want a major function of the game removed is pretty short-sighted. Let’s see all RL armies try to advance their main points of supply closer to the front because? So the enemy will complain they expect the allies to be forced to walk from the Normandy landing all the way to German lines 500 miles away? Oh, Nazi did send letter — Eisenhower you can’t use railway, airports, paratroopers, to advance reinforcements faster.
One of the basic rules of war “Firstest with the Mostest”
There’s an easy solution to this problem don’t leave your rallies unguarded Arty strikes you can’t do shit about, but you can guard the rally point from rally campers and trappers. Also, a special Airborne rally would be cool it’ll allow airborne troops to be Airborne troops.
that feel when i do this all the time tho
In some games, a spawnrape was awarded a kick of at least a few minutes and there is a reason to cancel the spawnpoint …
Raping the main spawn ≠ raping a frontline rally point.
Rallies are deliberately built closer to the contested area to gain a tactical advantage. They’re inherently unsafe. And optional.
I don’t think we have a contradiction and we understand the difference between attacking a RP and camping 15m behind RP.
It just comes to me unnecessarily changing the DP radically. I played games where there was an airborne + ground RP, possibly spawn on the leader.
It was interesting in Tannenberg: mix SL + area.
There is more variant and each has something for and against
sometimes main spawn is so far away, you dont stand a chance without a rally
so why you want them gone?
teleporting the soldiers, its unrealistic and will lead to unrealistic tactics
you cant just teleport them, add other ways of mobility instead and fix the main spawns, to be truly at optimal range from the objective
rallies could, for example, serve as paratrooper destination, lets say if paratroopers jump blind, their landing area is large, but if they land near the rally point it zooms in… or something
90% of this game is unrealistic this is one of the most arcade game i’ve ever played, idk what’s the problem now with the rally points.
oh well, im trying to make it more