> He is not like Erwin, who was ready to “sacrifice some for the many” (though we don’t know what he would have done in this situation), Eren “sacrifices a lot for some”

Now let's translate that to BF2 Wake Island last flag rape scenarios!

Sits back and eats popcorn while sharky lays it all out.

All rigthy. Moving on...

https://medium.com/@ta...-eren-yeager-684a75f0610b

Well, you've mentioned that the players are working within the confines set by the developers, right? implying that it's their right to rape last flags, or to abuse air vehicles when it's not quite necessary or called for. So why should we break those long standing confines, to address the harsh environment that is typical of BF2?

And why punish all of the players, the good and the bad, just because there's a couple of air whores that spoil the broth? If I play Wake and I suck at helicopter, I don't think it's a problem if I pilot it with 4v4: I am not skilled, I am not a heli pro; a tree will take me down as easily as a human player (cause I suck at flying).

Why should I be punished (by not having my God Dev given right of using air attack vehicles) because a few good pilots overly play them and sometimes abuse them / bypass the intended confines of the game developer? (yes I am referring to you Black Hawk solo players ).


No, that's precisely the Battlefield experience... it sucks when it happens, but if the match ended that way, there's a reason: your team could not protect the Airfield (the central, most important flag) or react to it being captured in time and defend it; or your air force was not competent enough to prevail on the attackers air force. THAT'S Battlefield, that's why we play.

To improve, to turn matches around; to make friends, and enemies alike. I've played pretty much all day Saturday on our Wake Island: one of the most satisfactory times were losing the Airfield, fighting to recapturing it and pulling it off against all odds, as a team. Why should we "go woke" and babysit players when stakes are against them?

They should have played better, that will teach them what not to do on Wake Island (which is to never ever lose Airfield); if you change that dynamic you make it more fair / balanced I guess but once you go down that rabbit hole, then you want to start tampering more and more... until that's not Battlefield anymore, it's Babyfield.

The problem, we both agreed, is not the server or the settings: it's the players. If they would balance things out on their own, then it doesn't matter if you lose Airfield or it gets neutralized: they will be able to fight as a Team and win it back. Take down the enemy helicopter, survive the jet machine gun strafes or bomb runs, and get it back. If they can't? They either lose, or put pressure on other points of the map and start over, until the bitter end.

> https://youtu.be/7Dnel...o?feature=shared&t=83

It cannot be blamed upon the player since players act within the bounds their environment has set (which includes exploiting [excluding cheats/hacking, for this]). The game developers didn't think of that.


I saw more often that the player suggested it to the loosing team, rather his own. But of course either is free to waste their time to the bitter end.


I didn't think of it as a moral question, rather as a simple (relatively speaking) problem to solve.

I also think that it is very unlikely that these kind of players will struggle with consequences or thinking ahead, they rather control any situation if they want to, leading to [sometimes] dead servers and accusations as well. So if this very players would point this very issues out, they might be an helping hand, not malice. But that is rather rare, isn't it?


People act within the bounds their environment has set (which includes exploits [excluding cheats/hacking, for this]) -- People have to adapt, so have servers too. Because both can.

And because of that sometimes players say vile things because sometimes, without this environmental bounds, even an understanding, good hearted person will loose patience. Sometimes people have to be set to the right direction, so that they learn by doing as well. Some people, you must have seen it, match the definition of Anti-Social (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-social_behaviour) and this very people are very hard to tolerate, let aside appreciate.

But this aside the noob choppers, rather the expected behaviour of the majority of players on any server.


Anyway, in the end it was just an advice from the field of some players who could have solved technical issues regarding in this topic with ease as well.

Well, in our experience (also looking at other servers) tampering too much with the server mechanics can backfire... at the moment the server is rather vanilla and, welp... what you are describing is a player problem (most often that's wherein the problem lays, betweekn keyboards and chairs!! ), both in terms of the player who is raping as well as the player who can't handle it and is leaving the server (eg. when USMC does not try to cap last flag but circles it to farm kills, and blames those brave soldiers who fight to the bitter end, suggesting to them to just quit spawning).

Who is right? Who is wrong? It will be discussed forever and ever, but that's a behavioral issue that server settings alone might not be able to curb... it's the players that need to understand the consequences of their actions on the server first, and put those consequences ahead / keep them in mind, if they want to play and encourage fair-play. Raping noobs can be funny for one person, but detrimental for the server population.

There is no setting or nerf that will make people understand that... it must be coming from the inside. So, when you do address the situation by forcibly editing server settings (or modifying server values) well sometimes may be good, sometimes may be shit; you try to solve one problem, you have the best intentions in mind, but you end up causing more harm than good. My take is: it would be easier if people changed, not servers.

Also disabling choppers and jets when Airfield is captured (or Airfield + 1 (or 2) nearby flags are captured as well) because at this point, really most of the time, the game is pretty much over and the enemy team is just getting slaughtered at flag by choppers and jets which, in my opinion, destroys the Battlefield experience.

Since I started playing BF2 (mostly LS Wake) I have every morning a handful of players joining (ca. 10-20) over the span of, idk, 2 hours but then (unfortunately) leaving all at once because of choppers "raping" spawn points, sometimes jets too when highly skilled. A lot of said players seem to be novice. With that being said: Server would be filled more often and faster thus wouldn't it be better to disable (or infantry only) air vehicles till a certain amount of players are active?

You Sir deserve a medal. Unfortunately the best auto-balance there is, is players self balancing themselves.. which like you said is more common than rare, but that's one of the values we try to look into when recruiting for in-game administrators.

Staff Officer S_h_a_r_k_93 

This is an older threat, but still so relevant. I am not a particularly good player, most of the time a bit above average I would say, but when I see a team falling behind in the points, I switch teams and join.
Imho it is generally important to even the teams when a battle gets very one-sided, which sadly happens a lot on this map, especially when good pilots are all in one team (which also happens a lot for whatever reason, almost looks deliberate).
Maybe better auto-balancing from the server-side could help here?

Problem of course is, when one side just totally exploids it's airskills and then also ignores or insults other players for pointing this out, a lot of players just leave the server and thats the end of a good game.
Sadly a not too rare occurance.

Otherwise: Great job with the Server, LS-team, and it is generally fun to play on your servers!!