Originally posted by fogie55
Originally posted by SG✬21
omg....
You don't get it!!! the players tactics aren't changing which zone the player is to cover. It just dictates how he acts in the zone that was set in the DPC.
Using your example the player would be in a shallow zone with a zone depth of deep, meaning he will play back in that shallow zone rather than right up on the LoS.
Look at my 3 settings, deep balanced and shallow. does balanced look like a zone type to you?? No it shouldn't.....
Stop telling me I'm not getting it.... as a DC I can both put someone in a "type" (as you're calling it) of zone like "Deep Strong Half" or "Flat Weak Third" AND I can pick their assignment in that zone, either "deep," "shallow" or "medium," so unless your suggestion removes that from the DPC then you're going to have conflicts if the DPC assignment is different than the player's tactics
Unless you are saying that the tactics would only govern how they play within the zone and assignment they've been given--so if the DPC says "Cover Zone Shallow" and "Deep Middle Third" then the dot with "Play Deep" tactics would position himself in the shallow part of the deep middle zone (as directed by the DPC) BUT BEHAVE as though he was in the deeper part. The problem then is he's getting bonuses/penalties based on that incongruous behavior, which would either lead to numerous bug reports or huge exploits.
This is correct. Currently the DPC determines both which zone a player plays in, and whether he plays shallow, medium, or deep *within* that zone. Just within the DPc, on any particular play I can put the FS in a "Deep Weak Half" and tell him to play "Shallow" in that zone.
+1 to please stop telling fogie he's not getting it.
He's trying to be helpful and giving correct information. SG*21, please go check the DPC and see what we're talking about.
