Hi,
Noticed this on Airfield (Invasion) on the bunker objective.
As defenders we had like two whole squads inside the bunker but the attackers were able to cap the point from outside and move on regardless. Wouldn’t it make more sense if the attackers had to clear the objective in order to capture it?
Another downside to this issue is that when defenders are still on the objective (like in above example) it makes it much easier for attackers to rush the next objective. Having to clear the objective would mean defenders will have squads available to move to the next objective’s defence and would prevent a steamroll.
4 Likes
It seems to me that this is good, that map is very difficult for the Americans and that bunker you put 20 Germans camping inside.
In that bunker you can put through 2 doors and a hole in the roof, it is not the first time that I see the roof blocked with constructions and the doors with something in front to block them. Also the Americans are in the open field and the Germans come from the train track.
I know that in the Normandy landing you have to get into the bunker but I think the mechanics are different on this map
so you want the germans to have an easier time to defend by just hiding in areas such as attics?
2 Likes
No not really, but fair point. It shouldn’t be like one guy’s hiding somewhere in the cap zone blocking the cap – obviously not a good thing.
But defenders having more than a few soldiers in the cap zone should count for something, right? I don’t know how the mechanics work exactly but it seems like attackers just need to get enough people in the cap. Is that correct? If so, I think they should at least be somewhat required to clear the cap zone.
And I’m not talking about Airfield specifically, just capture mechanics in general.
Attackers have to have at least 1 more soldier than defenders on the point for it to start capturing. So if you had 2 squads sitting in the bunker that means they had more than 2 squads sitting outside of it. And if they had a bunch of people standing outside the bunker for 30+ seconds to cap the point sounds like they deserved to take it.
yes that is how it works
you know some buildings in normandy have a cap zone includes an attic, and you can get all your AI up there via sandbag and dismantle the sandbag to stay hidden, this can happen on assault, chateu conquest, and swamp conquest
I think you’re looking at the problem the wrong way.
The problem is that some cap zones are poorly designed so you’re able to contest a point while being functionally separate from it.
If you have 2 squads on a point and you can’t kill enough of the enemy to cut their numbers below yours, losing the point is your fault, unless like with the hangar, the enemy is all outside away from 90% of the point.
No seems 100% fair. If you have more dudes on the objective then it ticks really slow in your favor. Seems a good game design tbh.
For that bunker, if you change it that would mean the attacker needs to clear both sides of the bunker and the back side is towards the German spawn in line of sight. That should be a attackers advantage since in a good designed map, the defender spawn is visable from the point you attacked but the attackers spawn is not. So its easier to shoot the attacking guys from the spawn without the new spawners shooting you the other way around is really hard.
The cap when contested is way slower.
On really heavy contested caps, you need like 3+ minutes to capture the zone, compared to ~30 seconds when you fullcap it.
The system right now makes sense, and motivates you to run on the cap as a defender or attacker for cap pressure instead of forcing you to ONLY play around it until it’s freecap.
1 Like
It does - the attacker has to have MORE soldiers on it than hte defender - so if you have 2 squads they got to have quite a lot … and they have to stay there… out in the open… and stay alive for a minute or so…
Whats more if the number drops BELOW the number you have then the attackers lose cap points - it is at a much slower rate than they gain them, but it does mount up over time.
So TBH not killing any of them while they did that is a pretty poor performance by your team!!
I agree. Something that I don’t particularly like, is that the attackers can simply “nick” off the objective, when the defenders are still inside.
Realistically, it’s not fair, because attackers most of the time has to clear the area before move.
Both in Moscow and Normandy. You just ending up shooting the retreating defenders because they have no point in remaining ( outside taking a few tickets of attackers )
I guess you’re right. Defending a cap shouldn’t mean just sitting on it, but actively trying to push or kill off the attackers.
But to a player it’s puzzling and a bit annoying when you actually have a good defensive position within the cap zone and you are actively holding off enemies, but the enemies are still able to just cap the point and move past you.
I still think it might work better if attackers have to clear the cap zone, but then the cap zone design should fit that idea. Realism works as a guiding principle: IRL, to defend a house you wouldn’t hide in the attic and wait for the attackers to come get you, so the attic shouldn’t be part of the cap zone. On the other hand, to defend a bunker in WW2 you would absolutely put troops inside it and attackers would expect to have to clear it.
Yes, it would make more sense. Add more tickets to attackers as well to balance it.