Are you tired of players who refuse to retreat after losing the zone, or those who camp in a corner and let themselves get killed?
The solution is simple: after the zone is captured, say after 1 minute and 30 seconds, all players who haven’t retreated will be automatically captured and taken prisoner.
The number of prisoners captured by Teams 1 and 2 will be displayed. For example, if a player on Team A still has 5 soldiers and doesn’t retreat, 5 prisoners will be added to Team B.
This should already deter many players, but let’s improve the system even further: the prisoners will count as eliminations, and the experience will be awarded to Team B. That would be great, but the prisoner system could still be improved; in the meantime, it’s a good start!
1 Like
Nope.
This will never work.
After all, when the point it lost, you still need some soldiers to fight rear guard. Sure, most respawns will be back at the next major spawn, but you’ll still have people performing a fighting retreat, and still be able to spawn from any forward rally points.
What you’re suggesting is to remove any chance of this. That’s not how battles work.
I see where you’re coming from, but no, it’d make a fighting retreat impossible, and only ensure that the offensive army can simply overrun the defensive army completely. In this game we call it a steamroll.
Not balanced at all.
3 Likes
Sorry to those who voted no, but why?
These soldiers are supposed to be incapacitated.
And why aren’t the lost points awarded?
You acted irresponsibly by not retreating.
It’s only fair to compensate them, especially since this system won’t affect followers.
If you voted no simply because you’re the kind of player who doesn’t retreat when necessary, then don’t complain when someone wipes out your squad after the objective change and you’re killed as soon as you respawn…
So you have 1 minute 30 seconds before you get arrested; you can easily cover your allies’ escape and try to flee yourself. 
Fighting retreat.
Sometimes you’re down to one or two soldiers in your squad. Instead of suiciding, or running 150m back to the front, sometimes it’s better to do what you can to hold off the enemy advance.
This is actual fighting canon. It’s been done time and time again over the years. And in some cases, turned the course of a losing battle.
1 Like
I see no way this would work in the way the game works.
And for me, I’d rather take as many enemies out as the last man in my squad.
Never surrender. 
1 Like
You know, I’m not closed to suggestions… if it’s just compensating players who cause problems, we can cancel, and I want to remind you that in any case, it’s the Zone that kills you.
I suggest this to improve the game’s aesthetics and perfect the simulation. 
I get no joy out of taking prisoners, I do get joy out of liquidating stragglers
This wouldn’t add anything to the order of battle though, except to give the attacking army an easier run, and the defenders an even more harder job.
Again, I understand where you’re coming from, but in the scope of the game, this idea could never work without destroying any sense of balance.
1 Like
I honestly ask you, what doesn’t destroy the balance? 
Very relevant comment (sarcasm), but if three-quarters of the players think like you, this kind of thing won’t interest you…
Well for one, not suggesting something that could entirely destroy the balance of the game.
Here’s another point, what about guerrillas? Those squads are designed to work behind the frontlines.
As someone who enjoys causing shit behind the lines, what you’re suggesting would make those squads impotent.
Again, I see where you’re coming from, but it could never work effectively. Not in the way the game works anyway.
Uh, I said that it would have no impact on the fans, but the translator is distorting my words.
It’s not just about partisans.
Sometimes the battle requires some players to fight a retreat.
Making people who fight that retreat into prisoners just because of an arbitrary time limit simply wouldn’t work. Partisans or not.
1 Like
If I’m reading this right, this is basically making it so that the old control point is covered by a grey zone X amount of time after it has been captured. Isn’t it already like that on at least some maps?
Okay, I won’t insist any further 
There are good points and bad points about hanging back and fighting at the old cap point. Normally, if I am defending and we lost the point I will hang back as long as I can clearly see the enemy in that area, especially if I am down to my last soldier and figure it’s better to cap the people I can see then try and retreat with one dude, probably wounded with not an optimal amount of ammo. So, fight till he drops, then start over fresh with a new squad to defend the new cap point. However, if I have most of my squad alive, I usually won’t stay and fight for more then about 30 seconds or so.
On the other side, if my side just took the cap point, I made all my soldiers fast track athletes so I immediately start sprinting around the flank to the next cap point. It is amusing to see how many people remain at the old cap point while I just sprint around them on my way to the next. So, there are advantages and disadvantages to both, but both have their place.
1 Like
I was putting it nicely, but I think you’re just having too much of a skill issue to deal with stragglers.
1 Like