What do you think about our rules ?

Let's see what players think about it.

primarily the infantry at carrier, normally this doesn't happen too often and really proves little in rewards, but its fun sometimes when there is a handy boat the enemy dropped off for me, or a transport chopper is redally available.

Its also nice that were allowed to attack the essex, even though it is an uncap, its still not fair when servers enact rules that makes it difficult to keep the teams fair because one airfield is under constant attack and the other isn't (though I'm sure this is pretty equivalent to what would of happened in real life).

Nothing looks un-fair and it provides the least amount of restrictions formatted in a way that creates a nice atmosphere for game-play.

-Sym

Wouldn't change a thing BLANCOV. These rules are pragmatically effective, and fair.

I voted # 1 & #2

Commanders are gay!! That is all

jbuffethed wrote:

Commanders are gay!! That is all

Ouch
That hurts dougy.

I like things the way they are, I think they provide the best playing for both teams.


PS: just add Dixsy to the NO sniping E list, LOL


E

Snipers don't like commanders because snipers are always laying still somewhere, and are always easy targets for cartillery or artillery
but claimores are gay= [Gaymores]

I will again, voice my opinion on the no jets/attack heli's past arty island if US has no flag. This should include using a jet for transport to the carrier. Even if the jet doesn't attack, there is no defense. The pilot will always be able to parachute safely on the carrier, as the carrier defenses cannot shoot down a J-10 at full flight speed. The rules state no jets, it should be no jets period. Infantry is OK, but no jet rides. It is one thing to be able to lift off the carrier and have a slight chance. Or have a chance to stop a transport heli from reaching the carrier. It's a whole different thing to use a J-10 as a transport, to spawn rape the carrier. This is just poor sportsmanship, INVHO. US goes from half a chance to little chance. No different than air rape.

I think the rules are great!

The only rule I would consider changing is the mine rule, they should not be friendly... We have FF on, I think mines should be the same way.

Stockman wrote:

I think the rules are great!

The only rule I would consider changing is the mine rule, they should not be friendly... We have FF on, I think mines should be the same way.

If mines and clays are not friendly, we will have a lot of teamkills ans punishes.

vtrucker2000 wrote:

This should include using a jet for transport to the carrier.

Using a J10 for transport it is a waste for chinese team.
a J10 will not be in the air and j10 will take more seconds to spawn on airfield again.
F35's can rape the airfield to stop j10's trying to take off.
Normally, you know when a pilot bail on carrier, you just need to find and kill the infantry at carrier.
When I am commanding and depending on the team, I always spot infantry enemies on carrier and most of the time they dont care.
When this happens, I prefer infantry on carrier killing all these players interested only in flying instead of trying to cap a flag or defend carrier.

gblanco wrote:

Stockman wrote:

I think the rules are great!

The only rule I would consider changing is the mine rule, they should not be friendly... We have FF on, I think mines should be the same way.

If mines and clays are not friendly, we will have a lot of teamkills ans punishes.

Yes I know... However that said it would be more realistic as far as the usage of gaymores!

Stockman wrote:

However that said it would be more realistic as far as the usage of gaymores!

With the experience of the other server, we had more players leaving because mines and claymores were not friendly.
When playing with friendly claymores, what you need to do is have a medic in the squad to revive you.

Hey I'm sure your right blanco, the rules are great just as they are!

I still hate gaymores though!

I agree w buffet commanders are gay. and the only thing I disagree with is I think no arty on carrier ever should apply to both teams and not just china.

Bluegrass420 wrote:

I agree w buffet commanders are gay. and the only thing I disagree with is I think no arty on carrier ever should apply to both teams and not just china.

agreed also. no commanders would definitly give USMC the advantage on assaulting the island, but would make it easier for china to defend it by being secret.

Bluegrass420 wrote:

I agree w buffet commanders are gay.

Damn it Doug, this hurts more because Blue is not sniper.

I guess for me the rules are ok and the Server seems well populated each time I have been on as of late. Why change a working recipe.

That said I HATE commanders

Ya Ya every one hates commanders, untill they need some one spotted or some supplies or a vehicle drop ect... then there all lovey dovey

DangerousDoug wrote:

Ya Ya every one hates commanders, untill they need some one spotted or some supplies or a vehicle drop ect... then there all lovey dovey

I love commanders

I would prefer to have a functional woring team with a medic and supply guy in the squad and hence no need for a commander. The only time that a commander is useful is where we have a last player who is hiding and not attmpting to take a flag after all chinese flags are captured.

Be cool - Drink beer and vote no commander, it improves game play and team work.

M

I don't have a problem with commanders... When they do a good job.


I vote we don't allow snipers!

Dixsy would be grandfathered in! I respect a sniper that can kill me at 10' not a loser surrounded by gaymores camping at 200yrd.

Another good rule would be "Don't drop vehicles on mom's head!!"

usmom wrote:

Another good rule would be "Don't drop vehicles on mom's head!!"

Keep watching the sky usmom.

usmom wrote:

Another good rule would be "Don't drop vehicles on mom's head!!"

Do you remember the song...
Rain drops keeps falling on my head.



Imagine the same tune but with.....

damn cars keep falling on my head.