Re: Stealing Tanks is not Base Camping!
 

the big deal is....... most main bases have open exposed spawn points(on airfields near the vehicles etc. etc.) perfect for mass spawn rapage
and killing people as they spawn(majically appearing in pre-determined spot) is not realistic. no matter how you try to say it is.
people say "oh... we are killing reinforcements" well that would be fine, if i could move my spawnpoint after the first time im killed. how is it realistic, if you always know exactly where the new reinforcements are.
thats why i dont like pixel aiming arty either, i think its a exploit because spawns cant be moved. if we had dynamic, movable spawn points then it would be completely different story. irl if you start artillarizing an area, you may kill some of the enemy.. but then they move, requiring you to find them again.(spotting)

Re: Stealing Tanks is not Base Camping!
 

I was replying to someone else. And the fact that I put the "http://forums.filefront.com/images/s...rcastic%29.gif" after saying "how realistic." should hint at how I agree FH isn't 100% realistic.

Re: Stealing Tanks is not Base Camping!
 

Eliminate camping in the Uncaps.
But don't lock vehicles: There should ALWAYS be the threat of losing your KonigTiger (or whatever) to the enemy, if you get out to "wrench" in the middle of a fire-fight.
Examples of one side, or the other "pressing" the Enemy Vehicles into service are rampant:
I always mention the U.S. 83rd Inf. Division: It's nickname was the "Rag-Tag-Circus". They had P4's, Panthers, and even a Me109 "Gustav" in their arsenal by the Western-Wars end. Each vehicle got a quick olive-drab paint job, and then off to the Races!
They captured a German Officer's Mercedes, 'cuz the Driver thought he was driving through a German column (until the burst of MG fire stopped them).

Re: Stealing Tanks is not Base Camping!
 

If an enemy vehicle was captured during a battle, it was taken behind the lines, given a new paint job, repaired and then sent back to the front. That of course depends on whether you have a crew who know how to drive it and mechanics who know how to fix it, which they usually didn't. If the US troops found an abandoned Panther they wouldn't just hop in it and drive it to the front because they would be shot at by any US troops/guns/vehicles on the way, as there would be NOTING to show that it had US troops in it. There were no name tags in 1944/5.

IMHO all vehicles except trucks and jeeps should be locked, BUT in cases where captured vehicles were used, have them spawn with the team that captured them at the start of the game, in a suitable skin. For example a German army spawning with a T34 at their main, with a German skin, but an extrmely long respawn time to accomodate for the fact that there would be very few of them available. And indeed I'm in favour of removing all enemy name tags and only displaying friendly ones within 20 or so metres.

This solves the problem of capturing enemy vehicles in the middle of a game (which is highly unrealistic) and allows people to use captured equipment, albeit in limited numbers.

Re: Stealing Tanks is not Base Camping!
 

Your example is out of context.
Snipers had nothing to do with the outcome of the Battle of Britain. Neither do they have anything to do with the outcome of most FH battles. If you're just standing, waiting for a plane while the rest of your team is doing all the work, you deserve to be sniped.

Speaking of Battle of Britain - a perfect example of camping in WWII. I'm sure the British didn't like it very much, but they did something about it to fix the problem instead of whining for someone to kick the Germans.

AGreed.

Re: Stealing Tanks is not Base Camping!
 

It's called sarcasm. Camping in the FH sense isn't realistic in the first place, and the example wouldn't fit in any case. No matter what battle I choose, there'll be no BF 1942-style camping. Or can you tell me an example of a soldier calmly walking into a fully staffed enemy base with hundreds of people, getting a vehicle, and calmly driving it back out undetected? I thought not.

Which they could have donehttp://forums.filefront.com/images/s...rcastic%29.gif? Who's "out of context" now, hm:smokin:?

But we're getting fa-a-a-r off-topic here.

The "re-painted capture vehicle" idea is good, actually. I think it could be implemented to good effect on maps with captureable main "spawns". For example, if the Germans capture a Soviet main base with T-34 tanks, they get gray T-34s with German crosses on them. If the Japanese capture a US main base with P-38 attack fighters, they get P-38 Lightning planes with Japanese paint schemes and red circles markings instead of US markings.

It'd require a bit of re-texturing by the developers, though. I'm not sure if it's worth the effort.

The idea of captured equipment in your main base with a long re-appearance delay is good, too.

Re: Stealing Tanks is not Base Camping!
 

The reason you don't see this in actual wars is because of security. As a soldier on your team, you have the responsibility to defend your base from intruders.

Re: Stealing Tanks is not Base Camping!
 

Well, I can tell you at least Lobo requested anti base camping code, which also prevents vehicle stealing, so this is pretty futile for future FH versions. (At least on some maps)

Re: Stealing Tanks is not Base Camping!
 

So.. if some-one enters a base, its insta-death. Or just a fast bleed?

Re: Stealing Tanks is not Base Camping!
 

I will reply you after I place them right now in Pavlov and Pegasus...evil laugh