He’s attempting to curb the snowball effect of a winning opponent, but such a change would have to be enforced by game, not by the effort of defender’s, since they’re most likely broken already and have little means to stop it.
I can see the benefit of his idea, yet I’d wager it would just make the attackers even more prone to pull every trick out of the META book just to win, making this game mode sweaty as hell.
Issue is that is directly meddling with the pace of game. Setting a handicap for one side, who has earned the momentum, while other is basically there to reap all benefits. An issue I have with his suggestion overall.
Attackers already use every sweaty method possible like the rifle grenade spam, especially at higher br. This game mode is already the sweatiest I’ve had experience with. However again I wouldn’t be opposed to getting attackers a couple more respawns for capping objectives as a way to balance my suggestion out.
Yep basically what I am after. At least some kind of compensation for the attackers if not a direct penalization of the defender side.
But I fear you’d make guerrillas unusable, since like you said, it is to infiltrate and move to the next CP, yet the risk it carries is quite high, since they’re also directly hindering the main attack force by reducing it’s numbers.
Sure they can switch to rally hunting, should the breakthrough fail, but you’re stuck having deployed a squad weaker than any other in terms of manpower and firepower.
I am also quite fearful of the AP spam fest giving defenders the time would lead to, oh the cancer.
Their whole point of existence is rally hunting and fortification dismantling, they’re not meant to pre-cap. It does literally state that they’re meant for rally hunting and fortification dismantling in their description.
