I would instead like to see a generic bunker-type structure that allows soldiers inside to fire at the enemy without. It should also protect against artillery of course.
Well, it would be easyer to map it and to be honest, when i'm geting shelled by artilery in empires atleast i usualy go and try to locate that annoying thing shooting me rather then hide inside
Could be used as expensive barracks. Diversity ftw. Would be great to be able to build reinforced buildings or upgrade them. A Commander with a defensive strategy could concentrate on base defence by building turrets and the more expensive buildings / upgrade them.
What do infantry need a mega uber solid bunker for while the CV above ground is getting trashed? off the topic: arty need to be like artillery... slow reloading(tens of seconds instead of tens of milliseconds)... poorly armored (open top, perhaps even without own engine so they need to be towed in place)
this woud be useless if evryone of team X woud get inside this and team Y starts nuking the base, (with arty long range) killing all the buildings but leaving this shelter team X woud be lost (cv dies, cant build vehicles so cannot regain strenght) i woud prefer this to be a base of operations where the tunnel system starts, ppl can spaun, ppl can fire out, tanks can be stored (yust the cv woud be great allready) etc... bomb shelters woud just make a losing base getting destroyed slower what i woud prefer even more woud be some sort of "fortification kit" building it over normal buildings adds arty armor, hp, firing holes, barb whire, pillbox windows etc... to the building so you can fortify yourself decently
Yeah, but be sure to make the doors destroyable so the enemy can rush in and nade the hell out of the spawners :p
I'd say don't be so scared of artillery yet... When in a few months ( or whenever) aircraft are added, the first thing you do when you notice your base is being shelled, is launch those jets, fly towards wherever the smoke is coming from and destroy the artillery. Even if it is protected with AA, you probable will still be able to destroy the artillery tank before you're taken down. Or since you have an aircraft, you can use it to bomb their base, just like they are doing, and try to take out the artillery tank the old-fashioned way: grenadiers and tanks - or whatever, but no hiding. Everything will change whenever this happens, and I'm incredibly curious how everything will evolve. I didn't care about airplanes much, but the last few weeks ... well my opinion has changed. I won't be flying them (there isn't one game in which I can fly good), but it will add so much strategies to the game. But offcourse, even if not that necessary against artillery in the future, a bunker could be used for whatever. I just don't think it should be a big building, but rather small. If you use a corner like you did at the entrance, a tank wouldn't be able to shoot inside the bunker (which you already thought off), no matter how small it is you'd be safe. Only the entrance would be dangerous. One corner would be best, reducing the blast radius when under attack to one part of the bunker. You could also use ladders, this way you do can have two directions to go to when entering, without risking an explosion in the bunker itself, keeping everyone inside safe till the whole bunker gets destroyed. From within you should be able to shoot through very small openings though. And if a tankdriver is able to shoot through such an opening, he deserves to kill everyone inside that bunker, or at least most of them.
When aircraft is added, we're going to need a bomb shelter even more desperately. Go inside and wait untill the bombing ends and the MLs have taken out/driven away the enemy bomber aircraft...
INSTEAD, I again pimp my idea to make more efficient use of the structures and map elements we have now. In other words, the radar is NEVER used now; it just sits on the back lines, lowering fps or whatever the fuck empty structures do. I say, put some holes in the walls and make it a radar/bunker for infantry, in the style of warcraft III's orc farm/bunkers. That, or put some firing slots into the barracks, and add some sort of ramp to the NF barracks to make the second floor not useless.
Why not make it a resserachable upgrade for the barraks? You ressearch say "Fortifications" and a few buildings can be upgraded to bunker like states: Barracks: Can be upgraded to Bunker, could possibly house 1 veichle (The CV) Possibly limited to 2-3 per team... Radar: Can be upgraded to what was suggested above (with a couple of holes and such to shoot out of) Repair Station: Can be upgraded to repair shop ( A 2 level building that repeairs faster and has spots to shoot out of the roof) Veichle Factory: Possibly no change, Maybe adds a 2nd story, for shootting out of Walls: Get upgraded to higher stronger walls, wich have spots for mountable turrets+gates and such Aircraft Factory: Gets upgraded to Aircraft Facility, has more HP+ AA guns on top. Turrets: Get a little barbed wire around them to prevent Bumb rushing into the blind spot. New Structures: Tank Cross: two beams welded togther( X shaped) think call of duty, free movement for infantry, but blocks tanks+ slight damage to tanks on impact
Shinzon, I really love most of the ideas. Diversion is good, and having upgradable buildings would help with that a lot. But if it would be like this, we need more 32 or even 64 player servers, since some will stay in barracks (bunkers), others stay in cover on the rooftops, ... Even now you only see a few people around you in large maps, and still only a small part of the map would get explored. With lots of people, it would be awesome though! Most of us attack, and some stay in base to protect the buildings against rush attacks and ninjas. At least it adds a lot to the rts part of the gameplay. When I attacked someone in a c&c game or an rts game whatsoever, I always had some units guarding the base, with some upgrades for my buildings I thought would be best in a given situation, while I was busy eradicating the enemy on the other side of the world.
