Balance ideas: limit of 5 (or server/map sets the maximum), make them use up a fair amount of space (needs a big drill or something on NF to search for res, BE would use some kind of chemicle treatment or something). They would need more space vertically, so you could cram a few close together, but theyd be easy targets on flat maps (the drill bits/chem tanks)
Nah, i prefer this system, since if you arent one of those team switchers who leave the loosing team, then you know what its like to strugle with no res to beat back the enemy team, and probably fail. Well if u have a mini res farm going, then you at least have a slim chance of beating the enemy back.
Why not mix this with the "Engy placing refs" idea. Infantry could place generators on certain places on the map, as to avoid farming. But are very week where like, 1 or 2 grenades would kill it.
So you're suggesting that you make them have a signficant impact on your res rate, in which case you lose the point of refineries. I have explained how having them be useful breaks the game, and having them be less useful makes them useless.
I disagree. If your team is losing on resources, the other team either a) took most (or all) refineries, b) conserved their resources better (by buying APCs instead of jeeps, for example :p ), or c) all of the above. In any case, they are the better team and should win, barring any ninjaing by your team or some late-game stupidity on their part.
I was thinking of something like Warhammer 40k, Where every point you control you get an extra 2+ Mini-generators that you have that produces 1/5 amount of a point and do splash damage when they're destroyed.
You dont get that in Warhammer 40K... You can build a single listening post that slightly increases requisition point income, but thats it.
no one should be forced to lose like that. If the enemys rush kill the ref and the com cant afford another it shouldn't be a death sentence.
If one team has a significant lead in the number of resource points they control, you aren't winning. If resource points are even or slightly one sided, it's alright because it will not cause you to lose your tech edge, only reduces the number of tanks you can put out. That won't kill you but it makes it harder. If you have significantly less resources, and can't research at all, you have problems. Streets of fire is a prime example of this, because BE can generally take middle easier than NF can.
"Then it kind of would be the team with the most Engineers that win.. " It wouldn't have to be an engineer thing.
If the enemy cripples your resourcing operation they shouldn't be able to win outright? Sounds a bit odd to me. If people are blowing up your refs, stop them, if you can't stop them, you suck, and you therefore lose.
That a bit harsh, i mean they might as well make it so you lose as soon as the enemy kills your refs. Being able to generate res without needing the high-res points means you at least stand some chance. Res generators generate half the res flow of the closest res node (or maby some kind of more res per units closer thing). The enemy (namely NF) has an advantage in the early stages of conflict, so this could at least let BE have some res to deal with NFs rush. Sure NF could put their Extractors neir Refs and supliment their income, but BE can too, and thus get meds faster to beat back NFs l33tlights.
If the enemy destroys your entire resource operation, you have no structures to recycle to make up 100 res, and you have less than 100 credits, I think you're probably in a position where you deserve to lose. Even if they aren't in that position, destroying all the enemy res nodes is a difficult thing to do, and should be a major blow to them, which it is.
So its hard to kill infantry concentrated on building a ref? With a tank no less?! I must be a pro then, cause i can kill ref-builders easy. Also, dont go off about what SHOULD happen, but what DOES happen in-game. Also, you usually have at least 1 res node in the starting area, so thats 1 ref+(2x.5refs)=2x res per increase. Or like 4x.5refs=2x res increase, depending on extractor limit, and how many are built.
Let us assume you haven't been picking your arse for the first part of the game and have captured your share of refineries. If you allow the enemy to come along and wipe them all out, which is difficult assuming you put up some resistance, you sort of deserve a penalty for your idiocy. If you're still building your refineries and the enemy has tanks capable of taking on several infantry at once, you're doing something wrong, and also therefore deserve a penalty.
To Vaun: Most maps either team spawns rather close to 2 refineries and has one built in base. If you can't push far enough to get a third or forth, or you do, but then don't defend an entire side of the map, you probably fucked up and should be fucked for that mistake. Stop arguing this point, you won't convince anyone other than yourself.
I support this idea. I think that stalemates occur too often and too easily at the moment. When one team takes control of the middle, usually the other team can never take it back after that, since they lack the resources to overpower the other team and to break through. On top of that, usually the battle for the middle happens in the first 10 minutes of the game. Resource generators costing ~700-1000 points each, generating resources at 1/8 of the rate of normal refineries, would bring tactics on the table in the later half of the game, making it practically possible to overcome territorial losses in long-lasting games, instead of leaving the other team to stagnate and fight a losing battle that can only be won if someone is lucky enough to ninja the enemy commander.
