I think we should have a bit more comm placable defences like towers, bunkers, walls that are only scaleable from one side... that's really all i can think of off the top of my head. The huge downside of these is that they'd probably require modeling. But the positives include: 1: more infantry based stuff in conquest maps 2: More base-like bases 3: would make battles look more epic Am i off my rocker here?
i have always been in favor of adding little gun emplacements to armories, or making armories more like bunkers-- that way they're full-fledged forward bases. But if that didnt work, these have always been a close second imo. Third place would be adding gun slots to the radar; so radars would have more combat-oriented roles.
And be prepared to hear it all again come release :D I'd love wall pieces that you could walk up and along.
So far I've seen one really good defensive device shot down Gates trust me from what i read so far about beta 2.0 we will need them to keep scouts out of the basses. Who wants to find out their main base got screwed by a scout or some newb commander/griefer but i don't want to necro a dead item ill leave it at that. Bunkers should be implemented It will help infantry in fighting tanks and nukes. Watch towers would help in sniping Tanks and Infantry. But I see 3 problems arising out of this 1rst is people shall say this is a waist of time for some of this, 2nd is the time it would take to script/mode/skin/sound/concept, 3rd would be the reasorces it would cost to build them in game.
just playing devils advocate here for a sec (cause i love the idea of defensive buildings in my heart) empires gameplay is too fluid and mobile to have static defences. if you push the enemy back from your emplacements then you NEED to push forward otherwise you are wasting valuable territory you could be taking while the enemy recovers for another attack. no one in their right mind would put a ring of walls around a base, it would take a dedicated engineer about an hour for most bases. a rule of thumb is: if you can hide behind it, so can they (how many times have i repaired my tank behind enemy walls, i can't count) if you can get out, they can get in. if make a line of walls it takes 60 seconds to build and only 10 seconds to deconstruct. these really need to be addressed before we think aboot adding emplacements that no one should ever tactically think about sitting in. /devils advocate -------------- a pro for it though is that walls you can walk along would be great for if you are trying to hold a single area on your own while your team attacks another area. like you and one buddy could hold the east front on canyon while all your whole team fights though the west, that would be a great use for such defences.
Sometimes trench warfare isn't that great of an idea...Howver, I do think we need a couple more small emplacements. I thought they were being remodelled for 3.0? I'm sure they were gettin' a little makeover.
couldnt the refs themselves have mebbe a emplacement added to em. so actually defending teh refs becomes viable. something like a small bunker with ammos and gun slots.
suggested before, shot down before, I don't think the gameplay situation has changed enough to justify it.... but then again, like dee said, one could make that claim about this whole thread, so i'm just repeating myself here.
That was one of my big idea with this, but i kinda forgot it when i posted I think towers with useable mg guns and/or mls such would be pretty neat for something like that. And since they'd be stationary, it probably wouldn't be too hard to balance. Think about it, A small base with an armory, maybe two towers, and completley surrounded by one side only walls could help hold positions greatly. And if and when we get to x16 maps, strong defenses will probably be needed so refs and such don't get blasted into oblivion before people can get there to help.
I am a turtler at heart, so anything oriented toward defense gets a thumbs-up from me. I've wanted this ever since 1.0, The problem with manned defensive buildings are that people wouldn't want to man the guns (except for me of course ) every moment of the game. But for something like a bunker, I don't think this would really be a problem. If the bunker had an ammocrate inside of it, then they would be used to get ammoz when not under attack, and if they had significant enough firepower or defensive advantage, they would be used when the base is under attack. Evey time this idea gets shot down, a kitten cries. Think of the kittens.
You wouldn't have to man them the whole game, just when bases are under attack, and they could be used at chokepoints as early warnings or some such.
You know I always thought that the NFarmory if the crates where moved to were the shelves where a whole cut in the back and the vents on the side knocked out it would be a good bunker.
Exactly what I was thinking. A good comm would place some defensive structures around their original base and have the base boy build 'em, so if the tide turns quickly and their team is forced back on defense they can hold out long enough to switch to offense again.
Right now we really have nothing to defend against a siege... making it so that if one side gets the lead, the other can't catch up, since too much of their forces are tied up defending
I was just thinking about a defensive vehicle: It would have to be deployed, but provides cover, along with ammunition and health (crates) and has a light cannon on the top
