Behind the lines OP and garrison placement

[ZeroFuqsGiven]

What does everyone think about behind the lines OP and garrison placement?

I've been playing more often and have noticed that I really don't agree with this game mechanic.

While defending, it's incredibly frustrating when you lose your forward base and spawn into a rear base that is already under attack and harassed by the enemy.

And while on offense it just feels incredibly cheap.

I think the game would be more interesting if the team on defense had just a couple minutes to actually organize before it is attacked.

Its fine if the recon team can venture deep into the enemy lines and do their thing. But I am strongly against op and garrison placement before the forward base is capped.

What is everyone else's thoughts?

[Chum]

I don't like it. The ability to place any sort of spawn within enemy (and even the initial neutral territory in Warfare) makes combat engagements feel random, and unstructured.

Of course, you're always going to have those players that say it offers 'TACTICAL OPTIONS' neglecting to understand that it's at the expense of battle coherence and overall atmosphere.

Recon should not be enabled to place Garrisons.

Spawn placement rules definitely need another look at from the devs. Unfortunately, not much has been acknowledged about the topic.

[ZeroFuqsGiven]

Originally posted by Chum:

I don't like it, it makes combat engagements feel random, and unstructured.

Of course, you're always going to have those players that say it offers 'TACTICAL OPTIONS' neglecting to understand that it's at the expense of battle coherence and overall atmosphere.

Recon should not be enabled to place Garrisons.

Spawn placement rules definitely need another look at from the devs. Unfortunately, not much has been acknowledged about the topic.

Sorry I should have been more specific. I do not think recon squads should be able to place garrisons either. But I do think they should still have free reign to harass the enemy anywhere on the map, with maybe the exception of main spawns.

[Cptn_Miller]

Originally posted by ZeroFuqsGiven:

What does everyone think about behind the lines OP and garrison placement?

I've been playing more often and have noticed that I really don't agree with this game mechanic.

While defending, it's incredibly frustrating when you lose your forward base and spawn into a rear base that is already under attack and harassed by the enemy.

And while on offense it just feels incredibly cheap.

I think the game would be more interesting if the team on defense had just a couple minutes to actually organize before it is attacked.

Its fine if the recon team can venture deep into the enemy lines and do their thing. But I am strongly against op and garrison placement before the forward base is capped.

What is everyone else's thoughts?

Words of wisdom Lloyd... words of wisdom. This will change.

[=7CAV=MAJ.Mix.C]

Originally posted by ZeroFuqsGiven:

What does everyone think about behind the lines OP and garrison placement?

I've been playing more often and have noticed that I really don't agree with this game mechanic.

While defending, it's incredibly frustrating when you lose your forward base and spawn into a rear base that is already under attack and harassed by the enemy.

And while on offense it just feels incredibly cheap.

I think the game would be more interesting if the team on defense had just a couple minutes to actually organize before it is attacked.

Its fine if the recon team can venture deep into the enemy lines and do their thing. But I am strongly against op and garrison placement before the forward base is capped.

What is everyone else's thoughts?

I am not sure to be honest. I like the feel of the game as is but I also see your point. The problem I see off hand is that your notion could make it very difficult to capture certain points.

What for example, do you see as "Behind" the lines? If the answer is hostile (marked red) territory? I'd say that without the power to build at least OP's many points would be pretty much uncapturable. And surely not a lot of players are going to love making a 400 meter sprint across hostile territory only to be zapped by defenders who's garrisons and OP's are right there.

So there would need to be a totally different system that creates the front line beyond which Garrisons and OP's can't be built. Maybe the garrisons themselves could deny the enemy from building nearby? That would create the need to identify enemy garrisons, destroy them and then build your own garrisons to claim a bit of territory.

That seems like something I'd be interested to try but it could turn into a giant, unfun meatgrinder if things get too static. Over an open field for example.

So I guess I'm unconvinced but interested.

[happyapilot]

Spawn Meta Gameplay..

Been discussed many times over.

Personally hoping we will see a change in the future with more vehicles making a debut.

first online debut of this game by testers a lot of things where different, if I recall correctly you had to have more than 2 people at least to place something.. black circle ? bigger map.. no tanks
lot more running to frontline..

Currently there are gameplay mechanics I'm hoping will be looked at.. imagine the developers are busy enough so just have to wait and see what the future brings and hopefully the developers will shed some light about their choices in gameplay mechanics as I'm curious to learn about it..

bright side, they are implementing physics to bullets so that is already something I'm quite happy about, but I'm biased as I lean more towards re-creating and re-enacting, teamplay kind of style instead of the run and gun no ♥♥♥♥♥ given if i die.

But for now, games are more about who can place the most garrisons and get his army to re-deploy the fastest while taking out the enemy spawnpoints..

m2c

[RushTheBus]

As others have said, the garrison and re-spawn meta is super gamey at best and complete cheese at it's worst. Sadly, that's more or less the way it's been since the pre-alpha days. It works in a very basic form but i don't think it falls in line with the underpinnings of what the game is supposed to be, although those have evolved a whole lot since backing the Kickstarter. There is absolutely no question that the whole garrison / OP meta needs a real hard evaluation and a whole heck of a lot of change. Right now success is largely about out garrisoning the other team. I can only hope that it's remained this way this long in lieu of the addition of things like vehicles.

[spuddy]

Personally i think only recon should be able to place OP behind enemy lines. And ''No One'' should be able to place garrisons behind you. 9/10 games i seem to play is just the american team going miles behind you placing stuff and ruining what was a good battle/engagement.

Flanking is fine but not mass suiciding behind the other team to respawn. That's bad gameplay design .

I've noticed people that play germany rarely if ever do this.

[ZeroFuqsGiven]

Originally posted by Static:

Originally posted by ZeroFuqsGiven:

What does everyone think about behind the lines OP and garrison placement?

I've been playing more often and have noticed that I really don't agree with this game mechanic.

While defending, it's incredibly frustrating when you lose your forward base and spawn into a rear base that is already under attack and harassed by the enemy.

And while on offense it just feels incredibly cheap.

I think the game would be more interesting if the team on defense had just a couple minutes to actually organize before it is attacked.

Its fine if the recon team can venture deep into the enemy lines and do their thing. But I am strongly against op and garrison placement before the forward base is capped.

What is everyone else's thoughts?

I am not sure to be honest. I like the feel of the game as is but I also see your point. The problem I see off hand is that your notion could make it very difficult to capture certain points.

What for example, do you see as "Behind" the lines? If the answer is hostile (marked red) territory? I'd say that without the power to build at least OP's many points would be pretty much uncapturable. And surely not a lot of players are going to love making a 400 meter sprint across hostile territory only to be zapped by defenders who's garrisons and OP's are right there.

So there would need to be a totally different system that creates the front line beyond which Garrisons and OP's can't be built. Maybe the garrisons themselves could deny the enemy from building nearby? That would create the need to identify enemy garrisons, destroy them and then build your own garrisons to claim a bit of territory.

That seems like something I'd be interested to try but it could turn into a giant, unfun meatgrinder if things get too static. Over an open field for example.

So I guess I'm unconvinced but interested.

Building in the red zones on the front line is fine. What I'm not sure about is going passed the points that are uncapped and building bases so that when the front line is capped, you can just redeploy and basically beat the defense to the point

[Chef]

I have read several instances where devs have made it clear that they aren't thrilled with the current deploy meta and are going to make changes that will affect this current form of gameplay.
My money is on the new supply mechanics after soft target vehicles are introduced, I believe we will see a major shift in deploy mechanics from there.

[Barley_Mob]

Originally posted by datCookie:

My opinion on garrisons and outpost spawns has always been this:

Garrisons can be placed by infantry squads only, not Recon teams. These spawns are limited to friendly territory only.

Outposts may be placed in friendly territory or in the attacking sector, Recon teams may place outposts one sector further back.

This prevents the redeploy meta from taking place and also helps create somewhat of a frontline where people aren't just running around placing spawns wherever they please.

Agreed. Having only OPs in enemy territory would also make it easier to assign defensive vs offensive squads as well.

I do think recon should still be able to place garrisons in enemy territory. The only flanking garrisons would come from them and the required air drop would make it a decent risk/reward. The defenders would know approx where it is, so it would differ from today's: Surprise!!! The whole team is popping out of a ninja garrison!

[JDoucette]

Originally posted by datCookie:

My opinion on garrisons and outpost spawns has always been this:

Garrisons can be placed by infantry squads only, not Recon teams. These spawns are limited to friendly territory only.

Outposts may be placed in friendly territory or in the attacking sector, Recon teams may place outposts one sector further back.

This prevents the redeploy meta from taking place and also helps create somewhat of a frontline where people aren't just running around placing spawns wherever they please.

This is an absolute must! GREAT OPINION, Hopefully this gets implemented

[Paraplegic Rabit]

I think garrisons 1 square past the captured zone should be destroyed once the cap has been made. This would help mitigate some of the steam rolling. Enemy team attacking the point should absolutely be able to build garrison and OPs in enemy territory because then there would be no point for the defending team to even worry about flanks as after you pick off 2-3 of a squad, that squads ability to effectively attack a point is impossible. Hell even a fully healthy squad is ineffective when attacking a point from the rear when it’s 6vs30+, without a nearby respawn. It would promote front line combat and maybe the 45 degrees in either direction of the point with no need to watch for a rear flank. I don’t think recon should be able to put up garrisons but I’d be fine if only recon squads could spawn at them. HQ camping is a real problem. Firstly, HQ garrisons should never be allowed to be destroyed or suppressed. Enemies should show up automatically on map if they’re on the last column of the map, or that column should be off-limits all together. Some people might say well offensive mode would be impossible to win with constant reinforcements but all they would need to do is add another column of buffer between the last 2 caps and the HQ spawn, especially when all you have to do is cap 1 on them to win. I’ve yet to see a team win on defense on the last line of caps due to HQ spawning, just up the timer from 10s even and problem solved.

Edit: Recon should not have cap power so they can’t rush cap points from deep garrison spawns

[Elven Arrow]

Originally posted by datCookie:

My opinion on garrisons and outpost spawns has always been this:

Garrisons can be placed by infantry squads only, not Recon teams. These spawns are limited to friendly territory only.

Outposts may be placed in friendly territory or in the attacking sector, Recon teams may place outposts one sector further back.

This prevents the redeploy meta from taking place and also helps create somewhat of a frontline where people aren't just running around placing spawns wherever they please.

^ Just as the man said

[Rosenrot]

I think the game should give Garrisons and nodes a timer and not just remove them, at least then the loosing team is given a chance to fight back, as the team gaining the middle map zone seems to get a massive advantage, garrisons, nodes etc.

You can argue that it's what you get for loosing the point, but at the start of the game after first zone is won or lost, its hard for the loosing team to get even again.

Dropping 100 supplies behind enemy zone and building a garrison is light work for the gains that it can bring if the zone is won, enemy loose everything they have built.

[Slyk_MinionWorkz]

Originally posted by datCookie:

My opinion on garrisons and outpost spawns has always been this:

Garrisons can be placed by infantry squads only, not Recon teams. These spawns are limited to friendly territory only.

Outposts may be placed in friendly territory or in the attacking sector, Recon teams may place outposts one sector further back.

This prevents the redeploy meta from taking place and also helps create somewhat of a frontline where people aren't just running around placing spawns wherever they please.

I second all of this PLUS:
- I would limit Airheads to ONCE per round, per team. Use it at the correct moment and make it count. If twice, then the second should cost at least 2x the resources.
- I also think one recon squad per team is enough and I would not allow them any outpost beyond the first/attacking sector. They are too often too powerful in the bigger maps as far as impact-per-man.
- More emphasis on SL role to build garrisons and perhaps they need an Engineer within X meters to do so. Make it less lone-wolf or SL+Supply guy popping up garrisons as fast as the supply guy can recharge.
- No deployments of any OP or Garrison beyond the first sector other than that one-use Airhead.

Too many times a team will loose a cap zone and before they can get reset in any position, it's being capped or heavily attacked. It just sets the entire team on it's heels too often. I see just as many hard-fought/see-saw rounds but when it goes bad, it's ugly fast usually due to deep deployments and the rush of just go-go-go without any thought other than beating the other guy to the next point.

A more defined front would help encourage more team work across the board and limit the impact or allure of lone-wolf single players or even entire squads.