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?

[Pan_de]

The mechanics arent that bad if you actually react to them and build enough Garrisons,

Now ofc in a public game with a lot of chaos, it is likely that a team will slip up on that.

The easiest solution? hmm One could increase the cap time.

[Mortarch Of Blood]

I really dislike it. But who cares what we think. The devs don't.

[ZeroFuqsGiven]

引用自 Mortarch of Blood：

I really dislike it. But who cares what we think. The devs don't.

Yeah who cares. Play Beyond the Wire. They figured out everything the HLL devs can't and it just came out.

[Pan_de]

引用自 Dyerektor：

引用自 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?

hi ZeroFuqsGiven tbh I hate garrisons in enemy territory it's just flash mob META and just bring yet more unorganized chaos garrisons and troops all over the place.

Iv always regarded Garrisons like aircraft carriers and their aircraft like Ops.

Garrison is a temporary HQ away from HQ and you should us them as a temp base to set out from and Outposts to attack from, not attacking points of garrison as the relied on primary point of attack there are times circumstance or opportunity demands a garrison but for the most part you send the Outposts out and attack the point from Outposts that keeps squads together well encourages them to spawn at the same point their OutPost and also encourages them to work and move as a squad.

Update 9 Garrison completely destroyed that now we get a garrison instead of an Outpost and just random chaos of unorganization and a Garrison full of randomness a far cry away from the organized teamwork which HLL is marketed and promoted for being.

the clans and more organized folk will do it it will not happen in Public matches on official servers.

and there again is another part where it all goes wrong the devs are making META Changes etc that only work under properly organized circumstances ie private community organized event where everyone knows each other has likely got a role they play regularly within that community and the devs are trying to model and implement META that suits an organized match that will not work in an unorganized public match,

also this is not listening to the player base nor is it being realistic at all you cannot model the main game on private organization and expect the same results in a unorganized public environment on official servers it's wo two entirely different mind sets and approaches to the game.

I mean how was it before u9? I cant really think of another way how this game did look. THe only issue here is more the really short spawn timer.

[Pan_de]

引用自 Dyerektor：

引用自 TAWPan_de：

I mean how was it before u9? I cant really think of another way how this game did look. THe only issue here is more the really short spawn timer.

I remember no garrison in any red sectors only an Air Head could be dropped and those are limited.

squads would get in and drop Ops and attack point from Ops which was much better more organized META this game want to be organized but the meta is chaotic we can't have both it's causing major conflict.

one of the main problems with garrisons is garrison placement. anyone with at lest a few hundred or thousand hours will know the maps pretty well and the limited places for garrison placement and will know where the most likely place to find a garrison will be and 8/10 times they will be correct cos there's only so many places you can place it.

and also that one straight front line.

the garrison placement is a bigger issue than the actual garrison meta imo

Idk. attacking only with an airhead? How do you even conquer anything with that? It´s hard enough nowadays to get attack garisons behind the red line going. When the enemy team knows to defend. If we do that we need to make huge nerfs to spawning and defending garissons too.

And surely ofc there can be a pro player taking all the garrisons sooo? then put another pro player to greet him.
Or I dont know what would be an alternativ to that kind of problem? Maybe make garisons take forever to build up and take down like in squad i guess?

[Medryn]

引用自 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.

You cant place in neutral anymore. And OPs are okay, its the garrisons that bother me.

[ZeroFuqsGiven]

I posted this in February of 2020 over a year ago......

[Cptn_Miller]

time to get rid of the airhead

[Wiener]

引用自 ZeroFuqsGiven：

I posted this in February of 2020 over a year ago......

Well, it took a dam long time for players to realize that the game design is sh1t.

[John Galt]

I agree, get rid of the airhead. Maybe make the garrison in enemy territory require 2 supplies, or a support AND an engineer?

[ZeroFuqsGiven]

引用自 Dyerektor：

引用自 ZeroFuqsGiven：

I posted this in February of 2020 over a year ago......

And here we are in April 2021 still having/continuing the same issue which says a lot

Yeah ive moved on. Beyond the Wire is way better. Gunplay is right. Guns sound awesome. THE GRASS WORKS.
the meta works. Screw hell let loose and it's console pandering devs.

[Wiener]

引用自 ZeroFuqsGiven：

引用自 Dyerektor：

And here we are in April 2021 still having/continuing the same issue which says a lot

Yeah ive moved on. Beyond the Wire is way better. Gunplay is right. Guns sound awesome. THE GRASS WORKS.
the meta works. Screw hell let loose and it's console pandering devs.

I'm sure I can take a look at BTW sometime.

[Funk]

Garrisions should not be allowed in enemy territory in "Warfare" or "Offensive" In "warfare" placing a garrison in your captured territory only, this forces SLs to use that as an attack garrison and push up there own OP which can be placed in the 2 blocks of enemy territory, this forces flanking too. It defeats the purpose of an airhead. Why should you be able to drop an airhead in enemy territory along with a supply drop on that airhead and build a garrison simultaneously. Airheads should be used strategically in enemy territory allowing SL to drop their OP for attacking, this requires more communication and strategy. Furthermore, you can drive a supply trunk into enemy territory and build 2 garrisons behind enemy cap point. This is now broken and should be fixed.

Building garrisons in enemy territory in "offensive"mode renders the objective of offensive from attacking the front lines, offensive should be a push from the front by the majority of forces. Now garrisons can be placed behind the point and the entire team can spawn behind the point, at least with only SLs being able to place OPs behind the point is more strategic and forces flanking maneuvers, along with strategic placement of an airhead. Not drop airhead and build garrison on airhead with a supply drop. This is also now broken and should be fixed.

Also why should nodes be destroyed if enemy caps the point in Warfare? With garrisons now being allowed built behind enemy cap point and in the 2 blocks, you are seriously cripplingly the other team to wage a come back, It should be up to the other team to locate and destroy those nodes. The majority of games now being played are "steam rolled" and unplayable.

[ZeroFuqsGiven]

引用自 Dyerektor：

引用自 ZeroFuqsGiven：

Yeah ive moved on. Beyond the Wire is way better. Gunplay is right. Guns sound awesome. THE GRASS WORKS.

the meta works. Screw hell let loose and it's console pandering devs.

I like Beyond the Wire (I was a tester before it hit EA) I had a fantastic time it's a great game but recently iv had problems with the controls so that set me back a bit I'm not into modern warfare games tbh I like old style war raw n primitive in a sense (well in comparison to modern warfare tech)but everything about it works pretty well considering it's only been in EA few months even in he early testing it was very responsive (even more responsive than hll which had been in development for much longer) before it even hit EA lol

it's had regular updates each ones has been pretty big and brought something significant to the game they have arty for the arty fanatics (and a system that works 100 time better than hll) and they have just had the big Queen and Country update iv not had much chance to check out properly yet.

they play the game a lot and ive been on the same squad as a few devs really good guys and lots of fun to play BTW with.

imo the price is a bit of a problem it's like £30 normally which seems a bit high for an EA game that's only recently hit EA it's currently in sale -35% which I feel is much better price range. I feel it would have gotten more players if it had been cheaper lest for a few month's and maybe do a little sale for a week when the "Queen & Country" update came out then raise the price a bit more after the sale.

on the other hand the higher price range dose discourage the kids and it dose seem to have a more mature and chilled player base not heard any of the toxicity etc in the BTW Comms like I have in the HLL Comms.

BTW Blows Hll Away for being Hardcore hll has not got a lookin

This is 110% accurate

[[EXDr] Geech]

引用自 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.

Interesting thoughts. I'd like to see something like this tried out. Recon making garrisons, No. not al all.